(XURSHDQ*RYHUQDQFH–$:KLWH3DSHU€¦ · (uuru8qnqrzqgrfxphqwsurshuw\qdph commission of the european communities brussels, 25.7.2001 com(2001) 428 (8523($1* 29(51$1&(˛$:+,7(3 $3(5

(UURU��8QNQRZQ�GRFXPHQW�SURSHUW\�QDPH�

'2&������

(XURSHDQ�*RYHUQDQFH�±�$�:KLWH�3DSHU

(UURU��8QNQRZQ�GRFXPHQW�SURSHUW\�QDPH�

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 25.7.2001COM(2001) 428

(8523($1�*29(51$1&(��$�:+,7(�3$3(5

(UURU��8QNQRZQ�GRFXPHQW�SURSHUW\�QDPH�

7$%/(�2)�&217(176

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................ 3

I. WHY REFORM EUROPEAN GOVERNANCE? ................................................................. 7

II. PRINCIPLES OF GOOD GOVERNANCE........................................................................ 10

III. PROPOSALS FOR CHANGE........................................................................................... 11

3.1. Better involvement ..................................................................................................... 11

3.2 Better policies, regulation and delivery...................................................................... 18

3.3. The EU’s contribution to global governance ............................................................. 26

3.4. Refocused policies and institutions............................................................................ 28

IV. FROM GOVERNANCE TO THE FUTURE OF EUROPE ........................ 32

(;(&87,9(�6800$5<

Today, political leaders throughout Europe are facing a real paradox. On the one hand,Europeans want them to find solutions to the major problems confronting our societies. On theother hand, people increasingly distrust institutions and politics or are simply not interested inthem.

The problem is acknowledged by national parliaments and governments alike. It is particularlyacute at the level of the European Union. Many people are losing confidence in a poorlyunderstood and complex system to deliver the policies that they want. The Union is often seen asremote and at the same time too intrusive.

The Irish "no" highlights the impact of these problems. on many people. This was reflected notonly in the final outcome of the referendum, but also in the low turnout and quality of the debatewhich preceded it.

Yet people also expect the Union to take the lead in seizing the opportunities of globalisation foreconomic and human development, and in responding to environmental challenges,unemployment, concerns over food safety, crime and regional conflicts. They expect the Unionto act as visibly as national governments.

Democratic institutions and the representatives of the people, at both national and Europeanlevels, can and must try to connect Europe with its citizens. This is the starting condition formore effective and relevant policies.

The Commission identified the reform of European governance as one of its four strategicobjectives in early 2000. Political developments since then have highlighted that the Union facesa double challenge: there is not only a need for urgent action to adapt governance under theexisting treaties, but also for a broader debate on the future of Europe in view of the next Inter-Governmental Conference.

Already within the existing Treaties the Union must start adapting its institutions andestablishing more coherence in its policies so that it is easier to see what it does and what itstands for. A more coherent Union will be stronger at home and a better leader in the world. Itwill be well placed to tackle the challenge of enlargement.

The White Paper on European Governance concerns the way in which the Union uses the powersgiven by its citizens. Reform must be started now, so that people see changes well before furthermodification of the EU Treaties.

The White Paper proposes opening up the policy-making process to get more people andorganisations involved in shaping and delivering EU policy. It promotes greater openness,accountability and responsibility for all those involved. This should help people to see howMember States, by acting together within the Union, are able to tackle their concerns moreeffectively.

2

The Commission cannot make these changes on its own, nor should this White Paper be seen asa magic cure for everything. Introducing change requires effort from all the other Institutions,central government, regions, cities, and civil society in the current and future Member States.The White Paper is primarily addressed to them. It proposes a series of initial actions. Some ofthese should help the Commission to concentrate its action on clear priorities within the tasksconferred on it by the Treaty: right of initiative, execution of policy, guardian of the Treaty andinternational representation. These will be taken forward immediately. The paper also launches aconsultative process which will run until the end of March 2002 on the need for action by theother Institutions and Member States.

By the end of 2002, the Commission will report on the progress it has made and draw lessonsfrom the White Paper consultation. This should establish a basis for taking the governanceagenda forward with the other Institutions.

The Commission will also actively participate in the preparation of the forthcoming EuropeanCouncil in Laeken, presenting its views on the political objectives which should be pursued bythe European Union and on the institutional framework necessary to achieve these aims. In doingthis it, will draw on the principles of this White Paper.

352326$/6�)25�&+$1*(

The Union must renew the Community method by following a less top-down approach andcomplementing the EU’s policy tools more effectively with non-legislative instruments.

%HWWHU�LQYROYHPHQW�DQG�PRUH�RSHQQHVV

No matter how EU policy is prepared and adopted, the way this is done must be more open andeasier to follow and understand. The Commission will provide:

• Up-to-date, on-line information on preparation of policy through all stages of decision-making.

There needs to be a stronger interaction with regional and local governments and civil society.Member States bear the principal responsibility for achieving this. But the Commission for itspart will:

• Establish a more systematic dialogue with representatives of regional and local governmentsthrough national and European associations at an early stage in shaping policy.

• Bring greater flexibility into how Community legislation can be implemented in a way whichtakes account of regional and local conditions.

• Establish and publish minimum standards for consultation on EU policy.

• Establish partnership arrangements going beyond the minimum standards in selected areascommitting the Commission to additional consultation in return for more guarantees of theopenness and representativity of the organisations consulted.

3

%HWWHU�SROLFLHV��UHJXODWLRQ�DQG�GHOLYHU\

To improve the quality of its policies, the Union must first assess whether action is needed and,if it is, whether it should be at Union level. Where Union action is required, it should considerthe combination of different policy tools.

When legislating, the Union needs to find ways of speeding up the legislative process. It mustfind the right mix between imposing a uniform approach when and where it is needed andallowing greater flexibility in the way that rules are implemented on the ground. It must boostconfidence in the way expert advice influences policy decisions.

The Commission will:

• Promote greater use of different policy tools (regulations, “framework directives”, co-regulatory mechanisms).

• Simplify further existing EU law and encourage Member States to simplify the national ruleswhich give effect to EU provisions.

• Publish guidelines on collection and use of expert advice, so that it is clear what advice isgiven, where it is coming from, how it is used and what alternative views are available.

More effective enforcement of Community law is necessary not only for the sake of efficiency ofthe internal market but also to strengthen the credibility of the Union and its Institutions.

The Commission will:

• Establish criteria to focus its work in investigating possible breaches of Community law.

• Define the criteria for the creation of new regulatory agencies and the framework within whichthey should operate.

*OREDO�JRYHUQDQFH

The White Paper looks beyond Europe and contributes to the debate on global governance. TheUnion should seek to apply the principles of good governance to its global responsibilities. Itshould aim to boost the effectiveness and enforcement powers of international institutions.

The Commission will:

• Improve the dialogue with governmental and non-governmental actors of third countries whendeveloping policy proposals with an international dimension.

• Propose a review of the Union’s international representation in order to allow it to speak moreoften with a single voice.

4

5HIRFXVHG�,QVWLWXWLRQV

The EU institutions and Member States must work together to set out an overall policy strategy.They should refocus the Union’s policies and adapt the way they work .

The Commission will:

• Reinforce attempts to ensure policy coherence and identify long-term objectives.

• Bring forward to the next Inter-Governmental Conference proposals to refocus theCommission’s executive responsibility.

The Commission calls on the Council to reinforce its capacity to take decisions and cut throughdifferent sectoral interests. The Council should also establish a stronger link between EU policyand national action. By assuming its political responsibility under the Community method, theCouncil would free the European Council to establish and follow more long-term strategicorientations.

The Council and the European Parliament should focus more on defining the essential elementsof policy and controlling the way in which those policies are executed. The Parliament shouldenhance its role in feeding into the political debate the views of its electors.

+2:�72�5($&7�72�7+(�:+,7(�3$3(5

Reactions to this White Paper may be sent directly to the Commission EHIRUH����0DUFK�����.The Governance Web Site: http://europa.eu.int/comm/governance/index_en.htm will provide updated information and link with interactive debates, includingdebates on governance initiated by institutional and non-governmental actors, debates on theFuture of Europe and the Commission’s portal on interactive policy-making.

If sent to the Commission, comments should be sent to:

VJ�JRYHUQDQFH#FHF�HX�LQW

Or by post to:

*RYHUQDQFH� :KLWH� 3DSHU������������(XURSHDQ� &RPPLVVLRQ������������&��� �����������������UXH� GH� OD� ORL� ���������������%������%UXVVHOV

Copies of the comments received will be posted on the Web Site. If you do not wish yourcomments to be available, you should make a specific request for confidentiality.

5

,��:+<�5()250�(8523($1�*29(51$1&("

European integration has delivered fifty years of stability, peace and economic prosperity.It has helped to raise standards of living, built an internal market and strengthened theUnion’s voice in the world. It has achieved results which would not have been possible byindividual Member States acting on their own. It has attracted a succession of applicationsfor membership and in a few years time it will expand on a continental scale. It has alsoserved as a model for regional integration across the world.

These results have been achieved by democratic means. The Union is built on the rule oflaw; it can draw on the Charter of fundamental rights, and it has a double democraticmandate through a Parliament representing EU citizens and a Council representing theelected governments of the Member States.

Yet despite its achievements, many Europeans feel alienated from the Union’s work.

This feeling is not confined to the European Institutions. It affects politics and politicalinstitutions around the globe. But for the Union, it reflects particular tensions anduncertainty about what the Union is and what it aspires to become, about its geographicalboundaries, its political objectives and the way these powers are shared with the MemberStates.

The decreasing turnout in the European Parliament elections and the Irish “No” vote alsoserve to show the widening gulf between the European Union and the people it serves:

• There is a perceived inability of the Union to act effectively where a clear case exists,for instance, unemployment, food safety scares, crime, the conflicts on the EU’sborders and its role in the world.

• Where the Union does act effectively, it rarely gets proper credit for its actions. Peopledo not see that improvements in their rights and quality of life actually come fromEuropean rather than national decisions. But at the same time, they expect the Union toact as effectively and visibly as their national governments.

• By the same token, Member States do not communicate well about what the Union isdoing and what they are doing in the Union. “Brussels” is too easily blamed byMember States for difficult decisions that they themselves have agreed or evenrequested.

• Finally, many people do not know the difference between the Institutions. They do notunderstand who takes the decisions that affect them and do not feel the Institutions actas an effective channel for their views and concerns.

People do not necessarily feel less European. They still expect Europe-wide action inmany domains, but they no longer trust the complex system to deliver what they want. Inother words, people have disappointed expectations, but expectations nevertheless.

6

7KH�GHEDWH�RQ�WKH�IXWXUH�RI�(XURSH�DQG�WKH�VFRSH�RI�WKH�:KLWH�3DSHU

This disenchantment and with it the fundamental questions concerning the future ofEurope will be the subject of intense debate in the run up to the Inter-GovernmentalConference. However, in preparing for further institutional change, the Union must startthe process of reform now. There is much that can be done to change the way the Unionworks under the existing Treaties. This is why the Commission decided to launch in early2000 the reform of European governance� as a strategic objective – well in advance of theNice European Council.

Reforming governance addresses the question of how the EU uses the powers given by itscitizens. It is about how things could and should be done. The goal is to open up policy-making to make it more inclusive and accountable. A better use of powers should connectthe EU more closely to its citizens and lead to more effective policies.

In order to achieve this, the Union must better combine different policy tools such aslegislation, social dialogue, structural funding, and action programmes. This wouldcontribute to strengthening the Community method.

Reforming European governance implies that the Commission must refocus on its coremission. The proposals in this paper will improve the quality of the way it initiates policy.They will ensure more clarity and effectiveness in policy execution, and maximise theimpact of the Commission’s actions as guardian of the Treaty.

:KDW�LV�WKH�&RPPXQLW\�PHWKRG"

The Community method guarantees both the diversity and effectiveness of the Union. Itensures the fair treatment of all Member States from the largest to the smallest. Itprovides a means to arbitrate between different interests by passing them through twosuccessive filters: the general interest at the level of the Commission; and democraticrepresentation, European and national, at the level of the Council and EuropeanParliament, together the Union’s legislature.

– The (XURSHDQ� &RPPLVVLRQ� alone� makes legislative and policy proposals. Itsindependence strengthens its ability to execute policy, act as the guardian of the Treatyand represent the Community in international negotiations.

– Legislative and budgetary acts are adopted by the &RXQFLO�RI�0LQLVWHUV (representingMember States) and the (XURSHDQ� 3DUOLDPHQW (representing citizens). The use ofqualified majority voting in the Council is an essential element in ensuring theeffectiveness of this method. Execution of policy is entrusted to the Commission andnational authorities.

– The (XURSHDQ�&RXUW�RI�-XVWLFH�guarantees respect for the rule of law.

� “Governance” means rules, processes and behaviour that affect the way in which powers are exercised at

European level, particularly as regards openness, participation, accountability, effectiveness andcoherence.

7

The Commission alone cannot improve European governance, nor can this Paper providea magic cure for everything. Change requires concerted action by all the EuropeanInstitutions, present and future Member States, regional and local authorities, and civilsociety. This paper is primarily addressed to them. Their commitment to reformingEuropean governance will be essential in order to regain confidence before the next roundof institutional reform. Elected officeholders at various levels, in particular at nationallevel, have a crucial role in this context.

The Union’s credibility will eventually be judged by its ability to add value to nationalpolicies and address people’s concerns more effectively at European and global level. TheWhite Paper identifies the tools that are needed to establish more coherence in theUnion’s policies and help the work of the various Institutions. It emphasises the need forEU action to be balanced and in proportion to the policy objectives pursued. This will beeven more crucial in an enlarged Union. Finally, reform of European governance willimprove the EU’s ability to influence global developments.

7DNLQJ�WKLV�:KLWH�3DSHU�IXUWKHU

The White Paper proposes a set of initial actions, including some which refocus theCommission on its core tasks. These will be taken forward immediately and should alsoinspire change in the other Institutions. The paper also launches a consultative process onthe need for further action, in particular by the other Institutions and Member States.

The public consultation on this White Paper will run until 31 March 2002. It will continueto draw on the network of over 2,500 organisations and people who have already takenpart in the governance debate in all parts of Europe, including the applicant countries�. Bythe end of 2002, the Commission will report on its progress and draw lessons from theconsultation. This should allow to establish the basis for further co-operation between theInstitutions on the reform of European governance under the existing Treaties.

In the meantime, the debate on the future of Europe leading to institutional changes in thenext Inter-Governmental Conference will intensify. The Commission will activelyparticipate in the preparation of the forthcoming European Council in Laeken, presentingits views on the political objectives which should be pursued by the European Union andon the institutional framework necessary to achieve them. In doing this it, will also drawon the principles of this White Paper. Moreover, the White Paper sets down markers forthe future of Europe and identifies where new ways of working will be held back withoutcorresponding changes to the EU Treaties.

� Internal Commission groups have contributed this work. Their reports are published in parallel with this

White Paper and can be obtained via the Governance Web Site mentioned above. The contents of thesereports do not reflect the official position of the Commission. In addition, a qualitative opinion survey in the15 Member States and in nine candidate countries contributed to the preparations of this Paper.

8

,,��35,1&,3/(6�2)�*22'�*29(51$1&(

Five principles underpin good governance and the changes proposed in this White Paper:RSHQQHVV�� SDUWLFLSDWLRQ�� DFFRXQWDELOLW\�� HIIHFWLYHQHVV� DQG� FRKHUHQFH. Each principle isimportant for establishing more democratic governance. They underpin democracy andthe rule of law in the Member States, but they apply to all levels of government – global,European, national, regional and local. They are particularly important for the Union inorder to respond to the challenges highlighted in the preceding chapter.

• 2SHQQHVV. The Institutions should work in a more open manner. Together with theMember States, they should actively communicate about what the EU does and thedecisions it takes. They should use language that is accessible and understandable forthe general public. This is of particular importance in order to improve the confidencein complex institutions.

• 3DUWLFLSDWLRQ. The quality, relevance and effectiveness of EU policies depend onensuring wide participation throughout the policy chain – from conception toimplementation. Improved participation is likely create more confidence in the endresult and in the Institutions which deliver policies. Participation crucially depends oncentral governments following an inclusive approach when developing andimplementing EU policies.

• $FFRXQWDELOLW\� Roles in the legislative and executive processes need to be clearer.Each of the EU Institutions must explain and take responsibility for what it does inEurope. But there is also a need for greater clarity and responsibility from MemberStates and all those involved in developing and implementing EU policy at whateverlevel.

• (IIHFWLYHQHVV. Policies must be effective and timely, delivering what is needed on thebasis of clear objectives, an evaluation of future impact and, where available, of pastexperience. Effectiveness also depends on implementing EU policies in a proportionatemanner and on taking decisions at the most appropriate level.

• &RKHUHQFH. Policies and action must be coherent and easily understood. The need forcoherence in the Union is increasing: the range of tasks has grown; enlargement willincrease diversity; challenges such as climate and demographic change cross theboundaries of the sectoral policies on which the Union has been built; regional andlocal authorities are increasingly involved in EU policies. Coherence requires politicalleadership and a strong responsibility on the part of the Institutions to ensure aconsistent approach within a complex system.

Each principle is important by itself. But they cannot be achieved through separateactions. Policies can no longer be effective unless they are prepared, implemented andenforced in a more inclusive way.

9

The application of these five principles reinforces those of proportionality andsubsidiarity. From the conception of policy to its implementation, the choice of the levelat which action is taken (from EU to local) and the selection of the instruments used mustbe in proportion to the objectives pursued. This means that before launching an initiative,it is essential to check systematically (a) if public action is really necessary, (b) if theEuropean level is the most appropriate one, and (c) if the measures chosen areproportionate to those objectives.

The Union is changing as well. Its agenda extends to foreign policy and defence,migration and the fight against crime. It is expanding to include new members. It will nolonger be judged solely by its ability to remove barriers to trade or to complete an internalmarket; its legitimacy today depends on involvement and participation. This means thatthe linear model of dispensing policies from above must be replaced by a virtuous circle,based on feedback, networks and involvement from policy creation to implementation atall levels.

,,,��352326$/6�)25�&+$1*(

The proposals for change are divided into four sections. A first section focuses onimproving involvement in shaping and implementing EU policy. A second section aims atimproving the quality and enforcement of EU policies. A third section calls for a strongerlink between European governance and the role of the Union in the world. Finally, afourth section examines the role of the Institutions.

���� %HWWHU�LQYROYHPHQW

0DNLQJ�WKH�ZD\�WKH�8QLRQ�ZRUNV�PRUH�RSHQ«

Democracy depends on people being able to take part in public debate. To do this, theymust have access to reliable information on European issues and be able to scrutinise thepolicy process in its various stages. Major progress has been made in 2001 with theadoption of new rules giving citizens greater access to Community documents.

But the Institutions and Member States also need to FRPPXQLFDWH�PRUH�DFWLYHO\�ZLWKWKH�JHQHUDO�SXEOLF�RQ�(XURSHDQ�LVVXHV. The communication policy of the Commissionand the other Institutions� will promote efforts to deliver information at national and locallevel, where possible making use of networks, grassroots organisations and national,regional and local authorities. Information should be presented in a way adapted to localneeds and concerns, and be available in all official languages if the Union is not toexclude a vast proportion of its population – a challenge which will become more acute inthe context of enlargement.

� See the Commission’s Communication on a new framework for co-operation on the information and

communication policy of the European Union, COM(2001) 354, 27.6.01.

10

Information and communication technologies have an important role. Accordingly, theEU’s EUROPA Website�, is set to evolve into an inter-active platform for information,feedback and debate, linking parallel networks across the Union.

Providing more information and more effective communication are a pre-condition forgenerating a sense of belonging to Europe. The aim should be to create a trans-national“space” where citizens from different countries can discuss what they perceive as beingthe important challenges for the Union. This should help policy makers to stay in touchwith European public opinion, and could guide them in identifying European projectswhich mobilise public support.

The European Institutions should jointly continue to develop EUR-LEX�, in 2002, as asingle on-line point in all languages, where people can follow policy proposals throughthe decision-making process.

Council and the European Parliament should make, from the beginning of 2002,information available more rapidly about all stages of the co-decision process,particularly concerning the final, so-called conciliation phase.

The Member States should promote public debate on European affairs.

5HDFKLQJ�RXW�WR�FLWL]HQV�WKURXJK�UHJLRQDO�DQG�ORFDO�GHPRFUDF\«

The expansion of the Union’s activities over the last fifteen years has brought it closer toregions, cities and localities, which are now responsible for implementing EU policiesfrom agriculture and structural funding to environmental standards. The strongerinvolvement of regional and local authorities in the Union’s policies also reflects boththeir growing responsibilities in some Member States and a stronger engagement ofpeople and grass root organisations in local democracy�.

Yet the way in which the Union currently works does not allow for adequate interactionin a multi-level partnership; a partnership in which national governments involve theirregions and cities fully in European policy-making. Regions and cities often feel that, inspite of their increased responsibility for implementing EU policies, their role as anelected and representative channel interacting with the public on EU policy is notexploited.

There is also criticism that the legislation adopted by the Council and the EuropeanParliament is either too detailed, or insufficiently adapted to local conditions andexperience; often in stark contrast to the original proposals tabled by the Commission.

� www.europa.eu.int� The EUR-LEX portal already offers a ‘one stop’ shop to access information about pending and adopted

Community law. (www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/index.html).� See opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 14.12.2000 on “New forms of governance: Europe, a

framework for citizens’ initiatives” (CdR 186/2000).

$&7,21�32,176

11

Criticism is not just focused on the Union. The principal responsibility for involving theregional and local level in EU policy remains and should remain with nationaladministrations. But national governments are often perceived as not adequatelyinvolving regional and local actors in preparing their positions on EU policies. EachMember State should foresee adequate mechanisms for wide consultation whendiscussing EU decisions and implementing EU policies with a territorial dimension. Theprocess of EU policy-making, in particular its timing, should allow Member States tolisten to and learn from regional and local experiences.

A complementary response at EU level is needed in three areas to build a betterpartnership across the various levels:

• ,QYROYHPHQW� LQ� SROLF\� VKDSLQJ. At EU level, the Commission should ensure thatregional and local knowledge and conditions are taken into account when developingpolicy proposals. For this purpose, it should organise a systematic dialogue withEuropean and national associations of regional and local government, while respectingnational constitutional and administrative arrangements. The Commission welcomeson-going efforts to increase co-operation between those associations and theCommittee of the Regions. Furthermore, exchange of staff and joint training betweenadministrations at various levels would contribute to a better knowledge of eachother’s policy objectives, working methods and instruments.

• *UHDWHU�IOH[LELOLW\. Local conditions can make it difficult to establish one set of rulesthat covers the whole of the Union, without tying up the legislation in excessivecomplexity. There should be more flexibility in the means provided for implementinglegislation and programmes with a strong territorial impact, provided the level playingfield at the heart of the internal market can be maintained.

The Commission is also in favour of testing whether, while respecting the existingTreaty provisions, the implementation of certain EU policies could be better achievedby target-based, tripartite contracts.. Such contracts should be between Member States,regions and localities designated by them for that purpose, and the Commission.Central government would play a key role in setting up such contracts and wouldremain responsible for their implementation. The contract would provide that thedesignated sub-national authority in the Member States undertakes to implementidentified actions in order to realise particular objectives defined in “primary”legislation. The contract should include arrangements for monitoring. The approachconcerns regulations or directives in fields where sub-national public authorities areresponsible for implementation within the national institutional or administrativesystem. The area of environmental policy might be a candidate for this pilot approach.Furthermore, the Commission has already committed itself to a more decentralisedapproach in future regional policy�.

� Second Cohesion Report, COM (2001) 21 final, 31.01.2001.

12

• 2YHUDOO� SROLF\� FRKHUHQFH. The territorial impact of EU policies in areas such astransport, energy or environment should be addressed. These policies should form partof a coherent whole as stated in the EU’s second cohesion report; there is a need toavoid a logic which is too sector-specific. In the same way, decisions taken at regionaland local levels should be coherent with a broader set of principles that wouldunderpin more sustainable and balanced territorial development within the Union.

• The Commission intends to use the enhanced dialogue with Member States and theirregions and cities to develop indicators to identify where coherence is needed. It willbuild upon existing work, such as the European Spatial Development Perspectiveadopted in 1999 by Ministers responsible for spatial planning and territorialdevelopment. This work of promoting better coherence between territorialdevelopment actions at different levels should also feed the review of policies in viewof the Sustainable Development Strategy�.

The Commission will:

- Establish from 2002 onwards a more systematic dialogue with European and nationalassociations of regional and local government at an early stage of policy shaping.

- Launch, from 2002 onwards, pilot “target-based contracts” within one or more areas,as a more flexible means of ensuring implementation of EU policies.

The Committee of the Regions should:

- Play a more proactive role in examining policy, for example through the preparation ofexploratory reports in advance of Commission proposals.

- Organise the exchange of best practice on how local and regional authorities areinvolved in the preparatory phase of European decision-making at national level.

- Review the local and regional impact of certain directives, and to report to theCommission by the end of 2002 on the possibilities for more flexible means ofapplication. The Commission will then consider a more systematic approach to allowsuch flexibility for some parts of Community law.

The Member States should:

- examine how to improve the involvement of local and regional actors in EU policy-making.

- promote the use of contractual arrangements with their regions and localities.

� Communication on a sustainable Europe for a better world, COM(2001) 264 final, 15.5.01

$&7,21�32,176

13

,QYROYLQJ�FLYLO�VRFLHW\«

Civil society plays an important role in giving voice to the concerns of citizens anddelivering services that meet people’s needs�. Churches and religious communities have aparticular contribution to make. The organisations which make up civil society mobilisepeople and support, for instance, those suffering from exclusion or discrimination. TheUnion has encouraged the development of civil society in the applicant countries, as partof their preparation for membership. Non governmental organisations play an importantrole at global level in development policy. They often act as an early warning system forthe direction of political debate.

Trade unions and employers’ organisations have a particular role and influence. The ECTreaty requires the Commission to consult management and labour in preparingproposals, in particular in the social policy field. Under certain conditions, they can reachbinding agreements that are subsequently turned into Community law (within the socialdialogue). The social partners should be further encouraged to use the powers given underthe Treaty to conclude voluntary agreements.

Civil society increasingly sees Europe as offering a good platform to change policyorientations and society. This offers a real potential to broaden the debate on Europe’srole. It is a chance to get citizens more actively involved in achieving the Union’sobjectives and to offer them a structured channel for feedback, criticism and protest��.This already happens in fields such as trade and development, and has recently beenproposed for fisheries��.

:LWK�EHWWHU�LQYROYHPHQW�FRPHV�JUHDWHU�UHVSRQVLELOLW\. Civil society must itself followthe principles of good governance, which include accountability and openness. TheCommission intends to establish, before the end of this year, a comprehensive on-linedatabase with details of civil society organisations active at European level, which shouldact as a catalyst to improve their internal organisation.

The Economic and Social Committee must play a role in developing a new relationship ofmutual responsibility between the Institutions and civil society, in line with the changes toarticle 257 of the EC Treaty�� agreed at Nice. In order to do this, its organisation and rolewill have to be reconsidered. Member States should take this new role into account whenappointing members to the Committee.

� Civil society includes the following: trade unions and employers’ organisations (“social partners”); non-

governmental organisations; professional associations; charities; grass-roots organisations; organisationsthat involve citizens in local and municipal life with a particular contribution from churches and religiouscommunities. For a more precise definition of organised civil society, see the Opinion of the Economicand Social Committee on “The role and contribution of civil society organisations in the building ofEurope”, OJ C329, 17.11.99 p.30.

��This would in particular provide a follow up to the Commission’s discussion document on the Commissionand non-governmental organisations: Building a stronger partnership, COM(2000) 11 final, 18.1.00.

��Green Paper: The future of the common fisheries policy, COM(2001)135 final, 20.03.2001.�� “The [Economic and Social] Committee shall consist of representatives of the various economic and

social components of organised civil society, and in particular representatives of producers, farmers,carriers, workers, dealers, craftsmen, professional occupations, consumers and the general interest”.

14

Like the Committee of the Regions, the Economic and Social Committee should be moreactive by developing opinions and exploratory reports in order to help shape policies at amuch earlier stage than at present. The Treaty currently provides for both committees togive their opinion after, rather than before, proposals have been transmitted to thelegislature, which minimises their impact. Working arrangements between theCommission and the Economic and Social Committee, similar to those under discussionwith the Committee of the Regions, are currently being finalised to give effect to a morepro-active role.

0RUH�HIIHFWLYH�DQG�WUDQVSDUHQW�FRQVXOWDWLRQ�DW�WKH�KHDUW�RI�(8�SROLF\�VKDSLQJ«

The Commission already consults interested parties through different instruments, such asGreen and White Papers, Communications, advisory committees, business test panels��

and ad hoc consultations. Furthermore, the Commission is developing on-lineconsultation through the inter-active policy-making initiative��.

Such consultation helps the Commission and the other Institutions to arbitrate betweencompeting claims and priorities and assists in developing a longer term policyperspective. Participation is not about institutionalising protest. It is about more effectivepolicy shaping based on early consultation and past experience.

��www.europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/update/panel/index.htm��www.europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/update/citizen/ipm.htm

15

+RZ�WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ�FRQVXOWV��7KH�H[DPSOH�RI�WKH��7HOHFRPV�3DFNDJH15��

The Telecoms Package of 6 measures currently in Council and the European Parliament wasdeveloped on the basis of widespread consultation�

�������� A number of studies assessing a range of market and regulatory issues launched.Workshops presenting and debating the studies.

0D\�-XQH������Working Paper on regulatory principles for telecoms reform for consultation.

1RY������Communication launching the 1999 Telecoms Review setting out general orientationsand inviting reaction.

-DQ������Two day Public Hearing with 550 participants.

$SULO� �����Communication on the results of the 1999 Review. More than 200 responses fromnational regulators, trade associations, consumer groups, industry and individuals.

0D\� ����� Draft legislation published in the form of five working documents for rapidconsultation.

-XO\������Adoption of package of six proposals by the Commission, currently under discussion inCouncil and European Parliament.

The European Parliament and its committees regularly seek public and expert viewsthrough consultation and public hearings, improving the quality of its policy deliberation.Some Member States systematically consult at a national level on proposals tabled in theCouncil.

In all these areas more should and must be done.

The Institutions and national authorities must reinforce their efforts to consult better onEU policies. Better consultation complements, and does not replace, decision-making bythe Institutions.

What is needed is a UHLQIRUFHG�FXOWXUH�RI�FRQVXOWDWLRQ�DQG�GLDORJXH; a culture which isadopted by all European Institutions and which associates particularly the EuropeanParliament in the consultative process, given its role in representing the citizen. TheEuropean Parliament should play a prominent role, for instance, by reinforcing its use ofpublic hearings. European political parties are an important factor in European integrationand contribute to European awareness and voicing the concerns of citizens.

��The telecoms package consists of 6 measures revising the existing regulatory framework for

telecommunications markets which launched liberalisation from 1 January 1998 and which now needupdating in the light of several years of effective competition. The measures address frameworkregulatory conditions and regulatory structures; licensing; interconnection and access; universal service;data protection and privacy, and the treatment of radio-frequency.

16

Furthermore, the involvement of national parliaments and their specialised Europeanaffairs committees, as already practised by the European Parliament, could also beencouraged.

There is currently a lack of clarity about how consultations are run and to whom theInstitutions listen. The Commission runs nearly 700 ad hoc consultation bodies in a widerange of policies. The increase in the volume of international negotiations generatesfurther ad hoc consultation. The Commission believes it needs to rationalise this unwieldysystem not to stifle discussion, but to make it more effective and accountable both forthose consulted and those receiving the advice. As a first step, the Commission willpublish a review of existing sectoral consultative fora.

Creating a culture of consultation cannot be achieved by legal rules which would createexcessive rigidity and risk slowing the adoption of particular policies. It should rather beunderpinned by a FRGH�RI�FRQGXFW�WKDW VHWV�PLQLPXP�VWDQGDUGV, focusing on what toconsult on, when, whom and how to consult. Those standards will reduce the risk of thepolicy-makers just listening to one side of the argument or of particular groups gettingprivileged access on the basis of sectoral interests or nationality, which is a clearweakness with the current method of ad hoc consultations. These standards shouldimprove the representativity of civil society organisations and structure their debate withthe Institutions.

In some policy sectors, where consultative practices are already well established, theCommission could develop more extensive SDUWQHUVKLS� DUUDQJHPHQWV�� On theCommission’s part, this will entail a commitment for additional consultations comparedto the minimum standards. In return, the arrangements will prompt civil societyorganisations to tighten up their internal structures, furnish guarantees of openness andrepresentativity, and prove their capacity to relay information or lead debates in theMember States.

In the light of practical experience of these partnership arrangements and the code ofconduct, the Commission will invite the other Institutions to contribute to extending thisnew approach to their own activities.

The Commission will:

- Adopt before the end of 2001 minimum standards for consultation and publish them ina code of conduct.

- Develop more extensive partnership arrangements from 2002 onwards in certainsectors.

The Economic and Social Committee should play a more proactive role in examiningpolicy, for example through the preparation of exploratory reports.

Member States should examine how to improve their consultative processes in thecontext of EU policy

The Council and European Parliament should review their relationship with civil societyand, building on the minimum standards for consultations, contribute to a generalreference framework for consultation by 2004.

$&7,21�32,176

17

&RQQHFWLQJ�ZLWK�QHWZRUNV«

European integration, new technologies, cultural changes and global interdependencehave led to the creation of a tremendous variety of European and international networks,focused on specific objectives. Some have been supported by Community funding. Thesenetworks link businesses, communities, research centres, and regional and localauthorities. They provide new foundations for integration within the Union and forbuilding bridges to the applicant countries and to the world. They also act as multipliersspreading awareness of the EU and showing policies in action.

([DPSOHV�RI�1HWZRUN�OHG�LQLWLDWLYHV

The yearly ‘Car Free Day’ on 22 September now mobilises around 800 cities in 25 Europeancountries on a voluntary basis

The Netd@ys initiative has increased awareness of schools, pupils and teachers of new media.Last year there were about 300 Netd@ys projects involving 150,000 organisations from 85countries and the European website received over 8 million hits.

Yet, many of these networks, whose roots reach down deep into society, feeldisconnected from the EU policy process. By making them more open and structuringbetter their relation with the Institutions, QHWZRUNV� FRXOG� PDNH� D� PRUH� HIIHFWLYHFRQWULEXWLRQ�WR�(8�SROLFLHV. More specifically, regional and city networks that supporttrans-national and cross-border co-operation, for example under the Structural Funds, areheld back by the diverging administrative and legal conditions which apply to eachindividual participating authority.

The Commission will:

- Develop by the end of 2002 a more systematic and pro-active approach to workingwith key networks to enable them to contribute to decision shaping and policyexecution.

- Examine how the framework for trans-national co-operation of regional or local actorscould be better supported at EU level, with a view to presenting proposals by the endof 2003 .

��� %HWWHU�SROLFLHV��UHJXODWLRQ�DQG�GHOLYHU\

The European Union’s policies and legislation are getting increasingly complex. Thereluctance of Council and European Parliament to leave more room for policy executionto the Commission means that legislation often includes an unnecessary level of detail. Innational systems this would be addressed through implementing rules under the control ofnational parliaments rather than in the laws adopted by those Parliaments.

$&7,21�32,176

18

The level of detail in EU legislation also means that adapting the rules to technical ormarket changes can be complex and time-consuming. Overall the result is a lack offlexibility, damaging effectiveness. A slow legislative process is compounded by slowimplementation – of the 83 internal market directives which should have been transposedin 2000, only five of them had been transposed in all Member States.

If rules are not supported or inadequately enforced, the Institutions as a whole are calledinto question. Apart from a new, more inclusive approach to policy shaping, the Unionneeds to boost confidence in the expert advice that informs its policy. It needs to improvethe quality of its legislation, including better implementation and enforcement.

&RQILGHQFH�LQ�H[SHUW�DGYLFH«

Scientific and other experts play an increasingly significant role in preparing andmonitoring decisions. From human and animal health to social legislation, the Institutionsrely on specialist expertise to anticipate and identify the nature of the problems anduncertainties that the Union faces, to take decisions and to ensure that risks can beexplained clearly and simply to the public.

The advent of bio-technologies are highlighting the unprecedented moral and ethicalissues thrown up by technology. This underlines the need for a wide range of disciplinesand experience beyond the purely scientific.

Recent food crises have highlighted the importance of informing people and policymakers about what is known and where uncertainty persists. But they have alsoundermined public confidence in expert-based policy-making. Public perceptions are nothelped by the opacity of the Union’s system of expert committees or the lack ofinformation about how they work. It is often unclear who is actually deciding - experts orthose with political authority. At the same time, a better informed public increasinglyquestions the content and independence of the expert advice that is given.

These issues become more acute whenever the Union is required to apply theprecautionary principle and play its role in ULVN�DVVHVVPHQW�DQG�ULVN�PDQDJHPHQW��TheCommission over a number of years has been responding to these challenges, forexample, through the revamping of its system of scientific committees in 1997 andensuring that scientific advice from those committees is publicly available. The currentproposal for a European Food Authority will enhance the Union’s scientific capability,transparency and networking in the area of food safety.

19

In many other areas, networking at European and even global level show clear benefits.Expertise, however, is usually organised at a national level. It is essential that resourcesbe put together and work better in the common interest of EU citizens. Such structuredand open networks should form a scientific reference system to support EU policy-making��.

The Commission will publish from June 2002 guidelines on collection and use of expertadvice in the Commission to provide for the accountability, plurality and integrity of theexpertise used. This should include the publication of the advice given. Over time theseguidelines could form the basis for a common approach for all Institutions and MemberStates.

%HWWHU�DQG�IDVWHU�UHJXODWLRQ�±�FRPELQLQJ�SROLF\�LQVWUXPHQWV�IRU�EHWWHU�UHVXOWV�«

The European Union will rightly continue to be judged by the impact of its regulation onthe ground. It must pay constant attention to LPSURYLQJ� WKH�TXDOLW\�� HIIHFWLYHQHVV�DQGVLPSOLFLW\�RI�UHJXODWRU\�DFWV. Effective decision-making also requires the combination ofdifferent policy instruments (various forms of legislation, programmes, guidelines, use ofstructural funding, etc.) to meet Treaty objectives. In making full use of the Treaty, theCommission could also make proposals to take the Union’s objectives forward throughenhanced co-operation.

At the same time, the Union must be able to react more rapidly to changing marketconditions and new problems by reducing the long delays associated with the adoptionand implementation of Community rules. In many cases these may run to three years ormore. A tension between faster decisions and better, but time-consuming consultation isnot necessarily a problem: investment in good consultation “upstream” may producebetter legislation which is adopted more rapidly and easier to apply and enforce.

Achieving improvements depends on seven factors.

• First, proposals must be prepared on the basis of DQ�HIIHFWLYH�DQDO\VLV�of whether it isappropriate to intervene at EU level and whether regulatory intervention is needed. Ifso, the analysis must also assess the potential economic, social and environmentalimpact, as well as the costs and benefits of that particular approach. A key element insuch an assessment is ensuring that the objectives of any proposal are clearlyidentified.

• Second, OHJLVODWLRQ�LV�RIWHQ�RQO\�SDUW�RI�D�EURDGHU�VROXWLRQ�combining formal ruleswith other non-binding tools such as recommendations, guidelines, or even self-regulation within a commonly agreed framework. This highlights the need for closecoherence between the use of different policy instruments and for more thought to begiven to their selection.

��The creation of such a broader set of scientific reference systems is one of the objectives of the European

Research Area.

$&7,21�32,176

20

• Third, the ULJKW� W\SH�RI� LQVWUXPHQW�must be used whenever legislation is needed toachieve the Union’s objectives:

– The� XVH� RI� UHJXODWLRQV should be considered in cases with a need for uniformapplication and legal certainty across the Union. This can be particularly importantfor the completion of the internal market and has the advantage of avoiding thedelays associated with transposition of directives into national legislation.

– �So-called� ³IUDPHZRUN� GLUHFWLYHV´ should be used more often. Such texts areless heavy-handed, offer greater flexibility as to their implementation, and tend tobe agreed more quickly by Council and the European Parliament. Whichever form

of legislative instrument is chosen, PRUH� XVH� VKRXOG� EH� PDGH� RI� ³SULPDU\´OHJLVODWLRQ� limited to essential elements (basic rights and obligations, conditions toimplement them), leaving the executive to fill in the technical detail via implementing“secondary” rules.

• Fourth, under certain conditions, implementing measures may be prepared within theIUDPHZRUN� RI� FR�UHJXODWLRQ. Co-regulation combines� binding legislative andregulatory action with actions taken by the actors most concerned, drawing on theirpractical expertise. The result is wider ownership of the policies in question byinvolving those most affected by implementing rules in their preparation andenforcement. This often achieves better compliance, even where the detailed rules arenon-binding.

– It has already been used, for example, in areas such as the internal market(agreeing product standards under the so-called “New Approach” directives) andthe environment sector (reducing car emissions).

– The exact shape of co-regulation, the way in which legal and non-legal instrumentsare combined and who launches the initiative – stakeholders or the Commission -will vary from sector to sector.

Under the following conditions the Commission will consider the use of co-regulationwhere it will be an effective way of achieving EU objectives.

&RQGLWLRQV�IRU�WKH�XVH�RI�FR�UHJXODWLRQ

Co-regulation implies that a framework of overall objectives, basic rights, enforcement andappeal mechanisms, and conditions for monitoring compliance is set in the legislation.

It should only be used where it clearly adds value and serves the general interest. It is onlysuited to cases where fundamental rights or major political choices are not called intoquestion. It should not be used in situations where rules need to apply in a uniform way inevery Member State. Equally, the organisations participating must be representative,accountable and capable of following open procedures in formulating and applying agreedrules. This will be a key factor in deciding the added value of a co-regulatory approach in agiven case.

Additionally, the resulting co-operation must be compatible with European competitionrules and the rules agreed must be sufficiently visible so that people are aware of the rulesthat apply and the rights they enjoy. Where co-regulation fails to deliver the desired resultsor where certain private actors do not commit to the agreed rules, it will always remainpossible for public authorities to intervene by establishing the specific rules needed.

21

• Fifth, in other areas, Community action may be complemented or reinforced by the useof the so-called “RSHQ� PHWKRG� RI� FR�RUGLQDWLRQ”, which can already involve theapplicant countries in some cases.

– The open method of co-ordination is used on a case by case basis. It is a way ofencouraging co-operation, the exchange of best practice and agreeing commontargets and guidelines for Member States, sometimes backed up by national actionplans as in the case of employment and social exclusion. It relies on regularmonitoring of progress to meet those targets, allowing Member States to comparetheir efforts and learn from the experience of others.

In some areas, such as employment and social policy or immigration policy��, it sitsalongside the programme-based and legislative approach; in others, it adds valueat a European level where there is little scope for legislative solutions. This is thecase, for example, with work at a European level defining future objectives fornational education systems.

– The Commission plays an active co-ordinating role already and is prepared to doso in the future , but the use of the method must not upset the institutional balancenor dilute the achievement of common objectives in the Treaty. In particular, itshould not exclude the European Parliament from a European policy process. Theopen method of co-ordination should be a complement, rather than a replacement,for Community action.

&LUFXPVWDQFHV�IRU�WKH�XVH�RI�WKH�RSHQ�PHWKRG�RI�FR�RUGLQDWLRQ

The use of the open method of co-ordination must not dilute the achievement of common objectivesin the Treaty or the political responsibility of the Institutions. It should not be used when legislativeaction under the Community method is possible; it should ensure overall accountability in line withthe following requirements:

It should be used to achieve defined Treaty objectives.

Regular mechanisms for reporting to the European Parliament should be established.

The Commission should be closely involved and play a co-ordinating role.

The data and information generated should be widely available. It should provide the basis fordetermining whether legislative or programme-based action is needed to overcome particularproblems highlighted.

• Sixth, a stronger culture of HYDOXDWLRQ�DQG�IHHGEDFN is needed in order to learn fromthe successes and mistakes of the past. This will help to ensure that proposals do notover-regulate and that decisions are taken and implemented at the appropriate level.

• Seventh, the Commission has committed itself to ZLWKGUDZ� SURSRVDOV where inter-institutional bargaining undermines the Treaty principles of subsidiarity andproportionality or the proposal’s objectives. The Council and the European Parliamentmust instead stick to the essential elements of legislation as mentioned above andavoid overloading or over-complicating proposals.

��See most recently the Communication on an open method of co-ordination for the community immigration

policy, COM(2001)387 final, 11.7.01

22

• Council and the European Parliament must also make greater efforts to VSHHG�XS�WKHOHJLVODWLYH�SURFHVV. When legally possible, Council should vote as soon as a qualifiedmajority seems possible rather than pursuing discussions in the search for unanimity.In appropriate cases, the Council and the European Parliament should attempt to agreeproposals in one rather than two readings with the assistance of the Commission. Thismay reduce the time needed to adopt legislation by 6 to 9 months.

&RPPXQLW\�ODZ�VKRXOG�EH�VXEVWDQWLDOO\�VLPSOLILHG«

Building on work on single market and agricultural legislation, a FRPSUHKHQVLYHSURJUDPPH� RI� VLPSOLILFDWLRQ of existing rules is called for – regrouping legal texts,removing redundant or obsolete provisions, and shifting non-essential obligations toexecutive measures.

Simplification at EU level must be accompanied by a similar commitment from MemberStates. People first and foremost want less red tape at a national level – they do not carewhether its origin is in European or national decisions. One of the biggest sources ofconcern is the tendency of Member States when implementing Community directives toadd new costly procedures or to make legislation more complex. Networks should beestablished between those responsible for simplification at EU and at national level.

The Commission will present an Action Plan for Better Regulation to the LaekenEuropean Council; within that framework it will:

- Promote greater use of different policy tools, (regulations, “framework directives”,guidelines and recommendations, co-regulatory mechanisms). These may becomplemented where appropriate by the use of the open method of co-ordination.

- Limit its proposals for primary legislation to essential elements, while providing greaterscope for implementing measures to complete the technical details of thoseproposals.

- Launch a high-profile programme to review and simplify Community legislationadopted before 2000, supported by fast track procedures in Council and EuropeanParliament for this work.

Council and European Parliament should limit primary legislation to essential elements.

Member States should refrain from a disproportionate level of detail or complexadministrative requirements when implementing Community legislation.

%HWWHU�DSSOLFDWLRQ�RI�(8�UXOHV�WKURXJK�UHJXODWRU\�DJHQFLHV

A range of national regulatory agencies exist across the Member States in areas with aneed for consistent and independent regulatory decisions. Increasingly these regulatorshave an important role in applying Community law.

$&7,21�32,176

23

At EU level, twelve independent agencies have been created. The majority of these bodieshave either an information gathering task, such as the European Environment Agency inCopenhagen or they assist the Commission by implementing particular EU programmesand policies, such as the European Training Foundation in Turin. In three cases EUagencies have a regulatory role��.

The creation of further autonomous (8�UHJXODWRU\�DJHQFLHV in clearly defined areas willimprove the way rules are applied and enforced across the Union. Such agencies shouldbe granted the power to take individual decisions in application of regulatory measures.They should operate with a degree of independence and within a clear frameworkestablished by the legislature. The regulation creating each agency should set out thelimits of their activities and powers, their responsibilities and requirements for openness.

The advantage of agencies is often their ability to draw on highly technical, sectoralknow-how, the increased visibility they give for the sectors concerned (and sometimes thepublic) and the cost-savings that they offer to business. For the Commission, the creationof agencies is also a useful way of ensuring it focuses resources on core tasks.

&RQGLWLRQV�IRU�WKH�FUHDWLRQ�RI�UHJXODWRU\�DJHQFLHV�DW�(8�OHYHO

The Treaties allow some responsibilities to be granted directly to agencies. This should be done ina way that respects the balance of powers between the Institutions and does not impinge on theirrespective roles and powers . This implies the following conditions:

• Agencies can be granted the power to take individual decisions in specific areas but cannotadopt general regulatory measures. In particular, they can be granted decision making power inareas where a single public interest predominates and the tasks to be carried out requireparticular technical expertise (e.g. air safety).

• Agencies cannot be given responsibilities for which the Treaty has conferred a direct power ofdecision on the Commission (for example, in the area of competition policy).

• Agencies cannot be granted decision-making power in areas in which they would have toarbitrate between conflicting public interests, exercise political discretion or carry out complexeconomic assessments.

• Agencies must be subject to an effective system of supervision and control.

��The Office of Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Alicante) and the Community Plant Variety Office

(Angers) take individual decisions on the grant of European trademarks and plant variety rights. TheEuropean Agency for the Evaluation of Medicines (London) makes a technical assessment of applicationsfor the approval of new medicines prior to a Commission decision.

24

The Commission will consider the creation of regulatory agencies on a case-by-casebasis. Currently, proposals are before Council and the European Parliament for threeagencies: a European food authority, a maritime safety agency and an air safety agencywith only the latter having a clear power to take individual decisions.

The Commission will:

- Define in 2002 the criteria for the creation of new regulatory agencies in line with theabove conditions and the framework within which they should operate.

- Set out the Community’s supervisory responsibilities over such agencies.

%HWWHU�DSSOLFDWLRQ�DW�QDWLRQDO�OHYHO

Ultimately the impact of European Union rules depends on the willingness and capacityof Member State authorities to ensure that they are transposed and enforced effectively,fully and on time. Late transposition, bad transposition and weak enforcement allcontribute to the public impression of a Union which is not delivering. The primeresponsibility for this lies with national administrations and courts.

Strengthening their administrative capacity of applicant countries is already a key themeof the pre-accession strategy and these efforts will need to be sustained after they join.The existing Member States should ensure that they too improve their performance andmake adequate resources available in this field. The Union can effectively draw on theexperience acquired with the applicant countries, such as the “twinning arrangements”.Current and future Member States should consider setting up co-ordination units withincentral government to improve the enforcement of Community law.

At the same time, the feeling persists that Community rules are “foreign laws”. (8�ODZ�LVSDUW�RI�WKH�QDWLRQDO�OHJDO�RUGHU and must be enforced as such. Despite long-standing co-operation with the European Court of Justice, national lawyers and courts should be mademore familiar with Community law, and assume responsibility in ensuring the consistentprotection of rights granted by the Treaty and by European legislation. The Commissionwill continue to support judicial co-operation and the training of lawyers and judges inCommunity law, but Member States themselves will have to step up their efforts in thisfield.

The role and effectiveness of the EU Ombudsman and of the Petitions’ Committee of theEuropean Parliament should be complemented by creating networks of similar existingbodies in the Member States capable of dealing with disputes involving citizens and EUissues. It should improve people’s knowledge of the extent and limits of their rights underCommunity law, and help them find which Member State authorities can resolveproblems. In some highly specific sectors, the creation of European regulatory agencies asproposed above will also contribute to a more uniform application of rules throughout theCommunity.

$&7,21�32,176

25

The Union is based on the rule of law. Monitoring closely the application of Communitylaw is an essential task for the Commission if it is to make the Union a reality forbusinesses and citizens. The Commission will therefore pursue infringements with vigour.In this context, individual complaints about breaches of Community law are important.The Commission has already adopted measures to improve and speed up internalprocedures for handling such complaints and these should now be codified and published.

However, as far as individual complaints are concerned, a lengthy legal action against aMember State is not always the most practical solution. The main aim of an infringementaction is to oblige the offending Member State to remedy its breach of Community law.Yet even after a ruling by the European Court of Justice further legal steps by thecomplainant may be required before national courts in order to enforce his or her rights.In order to maximise the impact of its work in dealing with complaints, the Commissionwill refocus on-going efforts and establish the criteria that it will use in prioritising casesincluding the following orientations:

3ULRULW\�DWWDFKHG�WR�WUHDWPHQW�RI�SRVVLEOH�EUHDFKHV�RI�&RPPXQLW\�ODZ

The Commission will focus on:

• The effectiveness and quality of transposition of directives as the most effective way ofavoiding individual problems arising at a later stage.

• Situations involving the compatibility of national law with fundamental Community principles.

• Cases that seriously affect the Community interest (e.g. cases with cross-border implications)or the interests that the legislation intended to protect.

• Cases where a particular piece of European legislation creates repeated implementationproblems in a Member State.

• Cases that involve Community financing.

Such cases should be handled as a priority in the framework of formal infringement procedures.In other cases, other forms of intervention could be explored before launching formalinfringement proceedings.

Finally, the Commission will continue to pursue an active dialogue with the MemberStates on enforcement. This has the advantage of improving feedback on how rules areapplied in practice. It also can lead to a faster resolution of a potential infringement than afull court case and therefore offer a quicker solution to the person at the origin of acomplaint.

26

The Commission will:

- Propose in 2002 twinning arrangements between national administrations to sharebest practice in implementing measures within particular sectors, drawing on theexperience with applicant countries, and promote the awareness on Community lawamong national courts and lawyers.

- Establish in 2002 criteria that will be used in prioritising the investigation of possiblebreaches of Community law .

- Codify the current administrative rules concerning the handling of complaints.

Member States must step up their efforts to improve the quality of transposition andimplementation. They must contribute to improving the knowledge of Community law,encourage national courts to take a more active role� in controlling the application ofCommunity rules. They should increase the capacity for dispute settlement throughnetworks of ombudsmen or mediators.

���� 7KH�(8¶V�FRQWULEXWLRQ�WR�JOREDO�JRYHUQDQFH

The proposals in the White Paper have been drawn up against the background ofenlargement, but they also offer a useful contribution to global governance. The Union’sfirst step must be to UHIRUP�JRYHUQDQFH�VXFFHVVIXOO\�DW�KRPH�LQ�RUGHU�WR�HQKDQFH�WKHFDVH�IRU�FKDQJH at an international level.

The objectives of peace, growth, employment and social justice pursued within the Unionmust also be promoted outside for them to be effectively attained at both European andglobal level. This responds to citizens’ expectations for a powerful Union on a worldstage. Successful international action reinforces European identity and the importance ofshared values within the Union.

In applying the principles of good governance to the EU’s global responsibility, theUnion should be more accessible to governmental and non-governmental stakeholdersfrom other parts of the world. This is already part of its strategy for sustainabledevelopment, but it must go hand in hand with a commitment by such stakeholders as totheir representativity and that they will assume their responsibilities in responding toglobal challenges. The Union should take the global dimension into account in assessingthe impact of policies, in establishing guidelines for the use of expertise, and through amore pro-active approach to international networks.

$&7,21�32,176

27

By acknowledging the global dimension more strongly, the Union will strengthen itsvoice in multilateral negotiations. It should aim to improve the effectiveness andlegitimacy of global rule making, working to modernise and reform international andmulti-lateral institutions in the medium to long term. The goal should be to boost theeffectiveness and enforcement powers of multi-lateral institutions. In the short term, theUnion should build partnerships with other countries in order to promote greater co-operation and coherence between the activities of existing international organisations andincrease their transparency.

International action should be complemented by new tools. Many ideas in this WhitePaper could be tested at global level, such as peer review of progress made towardsinternationally agreed targets or the development of co-regulatory solutions to deal withaspects of the new economy. As in the Union, these approaches should complementsuccessful elements of international public law, most notably the World TradeOrganisation and the International Court of Justice.

To achieve these objectives, the Union needs to speak more with a single voice. It shouldstrengthen its representation in international and regional fora, including in relation toeconomic and financial governance, the environment, development and competitionpolicy. Often, important improvements can and should be introduced under the currentTreaty, and would considerably improve the visibility of what the Union is doing at theglobal level. In some areas, like finance, a change in the Treaty is required.

The Commission will:

- Improve the dialogue with governmental and non-governmental actors of thirdcountries when developing policy proposals with an international dimension.

- Promote the use of new tools at global level as a complement to “hard” internationallaw.

- Promote a discussion in 2002 on how the Union can contribute to a�comprehensivereform of multilateral institutions and improve co-operation and openness ofinternational organisations.

- Propose a� review of the Union’s international representation under the existingTreaties in order to speak more often with a single voice and propose changes at thenext Inter-Governmental Conference.

���� 5HIRFXVHG�SROLFLHV�DQG�LQVWLWXWLRQV

Connecting the European Union to its citizens means identifying clear policies andobjectives within an overall vision of where the Union is going. People need tounderstand better the political project which underpins the Union.

$&7,21�32,176

28

The task is not easy. The step by step integration which has characterised the Union’sdevelopment has tended to slice policies into sectoral strands with different objectives anddifferent tools: over time the capacity to ensure the coherence has diminished. The currentworking methods of the Institutions and the relations with the Member States preventthem from showing the necessary leadership.

As a partial response, the Union has launched cross-cutting policy agendas, such as thosedeveloped in Tampere (1999) for freedom, security and justice issues; in Lisbon (2000)with an agenda for economic and social renewal extending up to 2010; or in Göteborg(2001) with the strategy for sustainable development.

But more needs to be done. The Institutions and the Member States must work together toset out an overall policy strategy. For this purpose, they should already refocus theUnion’s policies and adapt the way the Institutions work under the existing Treaties.

5HIRFXV�(8�SROLFLHV

The introduction of the euro and enlargement will be catalysts for fundamental changes.The euro will soon become a tangible reality in people’s pockets and will increase thevisibility of the Union at home and in the world. Enlargement will raise particularproblems in terms of the wide gaps between rich and poor countries. It will bring newchallenges for the management of the Union’s external frontiers and the relationshipswith our future neighbours.

Refocusing policies means that the Union should LGHQWLI\�PRUH� FOHDUO\� LWV� ORQJ�WHUPREMHFWLYHV. These may, with the overall objective of sustainable development, includeimproving human capital, knowledge and skills; strengthening both social cohesion andcompetitiveness; meeting the environmental challenge; supporting territorial diversity;and contributing to regional peace and stability. Improved focus will help to guide thereform of policies in preparation for a successful enlargement and ensure that expandingthe Union does not lead to weakening or dilution of existing policies.

In setting priorities and ensuring coherence, the Institutions must guard against decisionson future policies which are inspired by short-term thinking on long-term challenges. Thisis a real risk as in the near future institutional reform, important policy choices, budgetarybargaining and enlargement could all coincide. It is likely to stretch the Union’s capacityto show leadership through a coherent vision of the future. The Union must also continueto ensure that it has adequate resources to carry out the tasks assigned to it.

Within the Commission, important steps have been taken to strengthen its capacity forstrategic planning and policy setting as one of the three pillars of the on-goingadministrative reforms. They are reflected through key events each year that promote apolitical debate within the framework of the Commission’s five year strategic objectives:

• The Commission’s Annual Policy Strategy at the start of each year focuses onidentifying strategic priorities with a 2 to 3 year horizon. It enables a medium term,more coherent approach, and provides an essential reality check to ensure that thenecessary resources are available.

29

• The Commission President in his annual State of the Union address in the EuropeanParliament surveys the progress made against the Commission’s strategic priorities andindicates new challenges on the horizon. This is complemented by the annualSynthesis Report to the Spring European Council which covers the Union’s economic,social and environmental policies.

• In addition to this, from 2002 onwards, the annual report on the implementation of theAmsterdam Protocol on Subsidiarity and Proportionality will be oriented towards themain objectives of European Union policies. It will investigate the extent to which theUnion has applied the proportionality and subsidiarity principles in pursuing its maingoals.

However, attempts to structure a better debate on policy coherence need to be built on adialogue between the Institutions on future objectives and priorities for the Union. TheCommission’s role in initiating policy and steering the long-term agenda can beparticularly effective in preparing the (XURSHDQ�&RXQFLO. These Summits, which nowtake place four times a year, bring together the fifteen Heads of State and Governmentand the Commission President.

The European Council should have a more important role in shaping the strategicdirection for the Union in partnership with the Commission. It should not deal with theday to day detail of EU policies. The requirement for consensus in the European Counciloften holds policy-making hostage to national interests in areas which Council could andshould decide by a qualified majority of Member States. This is one example of a failureby the Council to assume its political responsibility for decision-making within theCommunity method.

5HIRFXV�WKH�,QVWLWXWLRQV

To deliver better policies, the Union must revitalise the Community method. Everyoneshould concentrate on their core tasks: the Commission initiates and executes policy; theCouncil and the European Parliament decide on legislation and budgets - wheneverpossible in Council using qualified majority voting, the European Council exerts politicalguidance and the European Parliament controls the execution of the budget and of theUnion's policies.

This means changes in the way the Institutions work. A lot could be done already in theshort term without amending existing Treaties. A greater effort to ensure the consistencyof what is done in different sectoral Councils is needed. The &RXQFLO� RI�0LQLVWHUV�� inparticular the�General Affairs Council composed of Ministers for Foreign Affairs, has lostits capacity to give political guidance and arbitrate between sectoral interests, particularlywhere this involves resolving disputes between different home departments over theposition to be taken on EU proposals. Some changes in the way it works have alreadybeen introduced by Council. The Presidency Conclusions of the Göteborg EuropeanCouncil called again for an ‘effective co-ordination between different Councilformations’. The consensus is that progress has been slow so far.

30

It is time to recognise that the Union has moved from a diplomatic to a democraticprocess, with policies that reach deep into national societies and daily life. There is a needfor the Council to develop its capacity to co-ordinate all aspects of EU policy both in theCouncil and at home. This would free the European Council to refocus its activity onshaping strategic objectives and monitoring more effectively the Union’s success inachieving them.

The (XURSHDQ�3DUOLDPHQW�DQG�DOO�QDWLRQDO�SDUOLDPHQWV of the Union and the applicantcountries should become more active in stimulating a public debate on the future ofEurope and its policies��. The strong relationship between changes at national level, EUpolicies and global developments cannot simply find its response in Brussels. Thesechanges should be discussed in a national context and in each national parliament. TheCommission would welcome public debates, jointly organised by the European andnational Parliaments, on the Union’s policies.

Moreover, the European Parliament should enhance its control on the execution of EUpolicies and the implementation of the budget. This means departing from the presentemphasis on detailed accounting with more policy-oriented control based on politicalobjectives. The areas in which co-decision should apply must be reviewed in order toreinforce the role of the European Parliament.

The &RPPLVVLRQ must focus on its Treaty tasks of policy initiation; execution; guardianof the Treaty; and international representation of the Community. The measures proposedin this White Paper, including an enhanced dialogue with European and nationalassociation of regional and local government, better and more open consultation of civilsociety, better use of expert advice, and better impact assessment will help to improve thequality of policy proposals.

The link between European and global governance should lead to the Union speakingmore often with a single voice. The prioritisation for dealing with complaints aboutbreaches of Community law will maximise the impact of the Commission’s work asguardian of the Treaty.

The proposals to simplify Community legislation further, better regulation through agreater diversity of policy tools and their combined use, and tri-partite contractualarrangements will all improve the quality of policy execution. The increased use ofregulatory agencies will ensure better execution and enforcement of policies in specificcases. It will also avoid having to assign Commission resources to too technical tasks.

��Member States should exchange best practice on the application of the Protocol to the Amsterdam Treaty

on the role of national parliaments in the European Union.

31

In the same spirit, the Commission has already proposed a communication and aregulation laying down the framework for the work of “executive” agencies under theCommission’s control. This means using external executive agencies rather thanCommission resources to management tasks for spending programmes.

It must also be clearer who is responsible for policy execution. This constitutes the pre-condition for making the EU system more open and accountable to all European citizens.

The main responsibility for executing policy and legislation by adopting implementingregulations or decisions is normally conferred on the Commission. The conditions underwhich the Commission adopts those executive measures should be reviewed.

In the end, this should lead to a situation where

• legislation defines the conditions and limits within which the Commission carries outits executive role, and

• a simple legal mechanism allows Council and European Parliament as the legislatureto monitor and control the actions of the Commission against the principles andpolitical guidelines adopted in the legislation.

This change would make decision-making simpler, faster and easier to understand. Itwould improve accountability, helping Council and the European Parliament to makepolitical judgements on how well the executive process is working.

If these orientations are followed the need to maintain existing committees, notablyregulatory and management committees��, will be put into question. Therefore a review ofexisting committees would have be undertaken and their continued existence assessed.This assessment should take account of the need for expert advice for the implementationof EU policies.

This adjustment of the responsibility of the Institutions, giving control of executivecompetence to the two legislative bodies and reconsidering the existing regulatory andmanagement committees touches the delicate question of the balance of power betweenthe Institutions. It should lead to modifying Treaty article 202 which permits the Councilalone to impose certain requirements on the way the Commission exercises its executiverole. That article has become outdated given the co-decision procedure which putsCouncil and the European Parliament on an equal footing with regard to the adoption oflegislation in many areas. Consequently, the Council and the European Parliament shouldhave an equal role in supervising the way in which the Commission exercises itsexecutive role. The Commission intends to launch a reflection on this topic in view of thenext Inter-Governmental Conference.

��Committees composed of Member States administrations assisting the Commission for the exercise of

implementing powers (see decision 1999/468/EC,“comitology” decision).

32

The Commission will:

- Use its right of initiative to focus debates more strongly on policy coherence andidentifying long-term objectives, building upon on-going efforts for strategic planningand reporting.

- Bring forward at the next Intergovernmental Conference proposals to refocusexecutive responsibility on the Commission, while streamlining the control by Counciland the European Parliament over how the Commission uses its executive powers.

The Council should improve the co-ordination between its various formations as well asits capacity for political guidance and its ability to link EU and national action.

The European Council should strengthen its focus on strategic objectives.

The European and national Parliaments should play a central role in stimulating publicdebate on the future Europe and its policies.

,9� )520�*29(51$1&(�72�7+(�)8785(�2)�(8523(

The challenge for the Union is to renew the European political process. The questionsraised by this White Paper and the answers it offers are linked to that renewal. This paperstarts a process responding to the disenchantment of many of the Union’s citizens.Alienation from politics is not just a European problem, it is global, national and local.But for the Union it represents a particular challenge. Given the deep level of integrationalready achieved, people have similar expectations for the Union as they have fordomestic politics and political institutions. But the Union cannot develop and deliverpolicy in the same way as a national government; it must build partnerships and rely on awide variety of actors. Expectations must be met in different ways.

Our overall goal draws on the simple principle that has guided European integration sincethe European Community was founded: integrate the people of Europe, while fullyrespecting individual national identities. The reforms proposed are possible if the Unionrekindles the original spirit of the EU Treaties and makes full use of the flexibility theyoffer.

Five political principles - RSHQQHVV�� SDUWLFLSDWLRQ�� DFFRXQWDELOLW\�� HIIHFWLYHQHVV� DQGFRKHUHQFH underpin the proposals in this White Paper. They should guide the Union inorganising the way it works and in pushing reforms forward within the current Treaty, butthey also provide markers for the debate on the future of Europe.

$&7,21�32,176

33

Together they allow better use of the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity. This isreflected, for example, in the weight attached in this White Paper to using the rightcombination of instruments to deliver policies that are matched to the objectives pursued,to limiting legislation to its essential elements, and to the use of contracts to take greateraccount of local conditions.

3UHVHQW�DQG�IXWXUH��D�TXHVWLRQ�RI�SROLWLFDO�ZLOO«

Building on these principles, the proposals in this White Paper will:

• 6WUXFWXUH� WKH� (8¶V� UHODWLRQVKLS� ZLWK� FLYLO� VRFLHW\. A code of conduct forconsultation will identify responsibilities and improve accountability of all partners. Itwill enhance dialogue, and contribute to the openness of organised civil society.

• 0DNH JUHDWHU� XVH� RI� WKH� VNLOOV� DQG� SUDFWLFDO� H[SHULHQFH� RI� UHJLRQDO� DQG� ORFDODFWRUV. In the first place, this is an issue for national authorities according to theirnational constitutional and administrative arrangements.. At the same time the Unionshould make fuller use of the existing potential for flexibility to improve the waysEuropean policies are applied on the ground.

• %XLOG� SXEOLF� FRQILGHQFH� LQ� WKH ZD\� SROLF\� PDNHUV XVH� H[SHUW� DGYLFH. The EU’smulti-disciplinary expert system will be opened up to greater public scrutiny anddebate. This is needed to manage the challenges, risks and ethical questions thrown upby science and technology.

• 6XSSRUW� WKH� FOHDUHU� GHILQLWLRQ� RI� (8� SROLF\� REMHFWLYHV� DQG� LPSURYH� WKHHIIHFWLYHQHVV�RI�(8�SROLFLHV by combining formal legislation with non-legislative andself-regulatory solutions to better achieve those objectives.

• 6HW�RXW�WKH�FRQGLWLRQV�IRU�HVWDEOLVKLQJ�(8�UHJXODWRU\�DJHQFLHV��These agencies canreinforce the effectiveness and visibility of EU law in the eyes of both business and thepublic by bringing decisions in some of the most complex and technical areas closer tothe sectors affected.

• 5HIRFXV�WKH UROHV�DQG�UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV�RI�HDFK�,QVWLWXWLRQ. This should help citizensto hold their political leaders and the Institutions to account for the decisions that theUnion takes.

Carrying these actions forward does not necessarily require new Treaties. It is first andforemost D�TXHVWLRQ�RI�SROLWLFDO�ZLOO� It is part of a wider process. Changing the way theUnion works calls not only for a response from the Commission, but also from all thoseinterested, particularly the Council, the European Parliament, the Member States andEuropean citizens.

By adapting governance at home, the Union will be better placed to contribute to newforms of global governance. Policies and global institutions must respond to popularconcerns.

34

$�QHZ�IRFXV�IRU�WKH�8QLRQ¶V�,QVWLWXWLRQV«

But what will really change if these changes are implemented? At the heart of theproposed reform of governance is the refocusing of the Institutions – the Commission, theCouncil, and the European Parliament. This should lead to:

• $�PRUH�WDUJHWHG�XVH�E\�WKH�&RPPLVVLRQ�RI�LWV�ULJKW�RI�LQLWLDWLYH. Better consultationand involvement, a more open use of expert advice and a fresh approach to medium-term planning�will allow it to consider much more critically the demands from theInstitutions� and from interest groups for new political initiatives. It will be betterplaced to act in the general European interest.

• (8� OHJLVODWLRQ� ZKLFK� LV� VWULSSHG� EDFN� WR� HVVHQWLDO� SULQFLSOHV� DQG� D� IUDPHZRUNVHWWLQJ� RXW� KRZ� WKH\� VKRXOG� EH� LPSOHPHQWHG. The White Paper shows how theCouncil and European Parliament can focus more on political direction and content,leaving implementation to the executive. But at the same time, both Institutions shouldbe able to streamline their control over the way the Commission carries out itsexecutive responsibility.

• 7KH�PRUH�HIIHFWLYH LQYROYHPHQW�RI�QDWLRQDO�DFWRUV�LQ�WKH�VKDSLQJ��DSSOLFDWLRQ�DQGHQIRUFHPHQW� RI� &RPPXQLW\� UXOHV� DQG� SURJUDPPHV. This will result from theproposals on dialogue, decentralisation, stronger co-operation between administrations,and more effective enforcement of Community law. Moreover, the greater theparticipation in European policies of national and regional actors, the more they will beprepared to inform the public about those policies.

This refocusing of institutional roles is an important step in preparing and managing asuccessful enlargement.

$�UHQHZHG�&RPPXQLW\�PHWKRG�DV�WKH�PRGHO�IRU�WKH�IXWXUH«

Both the proposals in the White Paper and the prospect of further enlargement lead in onedirection: a UHLQYLJRUDWLRQ� RI� WKH� &RPPXQLW\�PHWKRG. This means ensuring that theCommission proposes and executes policy; the Council and the European Parliament takedecisions; and national and regional actors are involved in the EU policy process.

The Community method has served the Union well for almost half a century. It cancontinue to do so, but it must be brought up to date.

In setting out the consequences of better European governance for the Institutions, theWhite Paper is drawn into the debate on the future of Europe. Reforming Europeangovernance also sketches a path towards future Treaty changes at the next Inter-Governmental Conference – it presents the outlines of a model for the Union’s futurepolitical organisation:

35

• In GLYLGLQJ� SRZHUV� EHWZHHQ� WKH� OHJLVODWXUH� DQG� WKH� H[HFXWLYH, the model followsthat of national democracies. At European level, separating these two roles wouldmake it easier to apply the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. In the contextof a gradual extension of the areas where decisions are taken jointly by the Council andthe European Parliament (the so called co-decision procedure), those two Institutionsshould enjoy equal roles. That is not the case under the current Treaty. At the sametime, this clarification of roles must allow the Commission to assume full executiveresponsibility.

• The Union needs FOHDU� SULQFLSOHV� LGHQWLI\LQJ�KRZ� FRPSHWHQFH� LV� VKDUHG� EHWZHHQWKH�8QLRQ�DQG�LWV�0HPEHU�6WDWHV. In the first place this is to respond to the public’sfrequent question “who does what in Europe?” A common vision is needed to answerthis question. The White Paper has highlighted a tangible Europe that is in fulldevelopment; a Union based on multi-level governance in which each actor contributesin line with his or her capabilities or knowledge to the success of the overall exercise.In a multi-level system the real challenge is establishing clear rules for howcompetence is shared – not separated; only that non-exclusive�vision can secure thebest interests of all the Member States and all the Union's citizens.

This White Paper in starting a process responds to the expectations of the Union’s citizens. Itshould enable them to see the Union as an instrument through which they can bring about change.The reflections on these reforms will now continue; they will be completed by the wider process ofconstitutional reform to be initiated at the European Council in Laeken: a process to which theCommission will actively contribute.

,3�

Bruxelles, le